The discussion about @author tags is an old debate that was solved years
ago in the favour of removing them. This is actually an official
recommendation made by the ASF Board:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/jakarta-jmeter-dev/200402.mbox/%3c4039f65e.7020...@atg.com%3E

Like Pascal said, the existing tags in the FOP codebase appear in code
that predates this recommendation.

In the present case, since you committed the files yourself, it’s
crystal-clear who is the author of the code IMO. svn annotate will
reveal that much better than an @author tag.

I think we should keep in line with the Board recommendation.

Thanks,
Vincent


On 01/03/12 09:00, Glenn Adams wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:17 AM, Pascal Sancho <pascal.san...@takoma.fr>wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> about @author tag, I agree with Vincent, reasons are clearly detailed here
>> [1] (note that it is not a strict rule, just an "incitation").
>>
>> IIRC, this "incitation" had been discussed a long time after the FOP
>> project began, and in addition, some parts (like rtf) had been developed
>> outside FOP before donated to FOP project. So it can remain some old code
>> or recently added libs that do not respect FOP coding style rules, that
>> should not be taken as example.
>>
>> [1] 
>> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/**fop/dev/conventions.html#java-**style<http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/dev/conventions.html#java-style>
> 
> 
> From what I can tell from the comments in [1], this convention was
> motivated by avoiding possible clutter from having every modification to a
> file (by a different author/contributor) be marked; that is, used as a form
> of history log.
> 
> From my reading, I don't believe this convention is intended to apply for
> original authors. This is backed by the language in [1] explicitly stating
> "excepted from this general rule are potentially confusing or wide ranging
> changes". In the present case, I would characterize the new CS files as
> "wide ranging changes". Also, I note that [1] states that this convention
> is: "not enforced; anyone is free to remove such comments".
> 
> As I stated in my prior mail above, I believe there is value to retaining
> @author in the case of original author attribution as well as for those
> cases where an existing work is significantly altered (in a wide ranging
> manner). This information is independent of the svn log and should not be
> discarded (in my opinion).
> 
> FYI, I did not add @author to any existing file that I modified; only to
> new files I originated.
> 
> G.
> 

Reply via email to